This was written in December by Keith Isley of the Hardball Times website. Some good stuff in here, it's an interesting look at some of the factors involved in Marlins attendence in recent years. Hardball Times, for those of you not familiar with them, tend to take a very statistical view, so they've always got a lot of data to back up their findings. It can be a little overwhelming if you don't like numbers, but it's good reading.

 

Hardball Times - Are South Florida Fans at Fault?

 

Are South Florida Fans at Fault?

by Keith Isley

December 12, 2005

 

Soon after the Florida Marlins announced that the club would explore relocation and hold a ?fire sale? to reduce payroll, South Florida sportswriters and broadcasters identified the responsible party: the fans. Never mind the team's inability to obtain public funding for a new ballpark; the ungrateful fans deserve the blame for this Fishy fiscal fizzle. Although owner Jeffrey Loria exonerated them, some Marlins fans?seemingly eager to jump aboard another Miami bandwagon?confessed culpability for this baseball banana republic. In response to a newspaper?s online poll that asked ?who is most to blame for the Marlins? fire sale,? 36% of the 8,429 participants fingered the ?fans who don?t show up,? while only 19% blamed elected officials for not helping the team get a new stadium.

 

On the surface, South Florida does indeed look like a lousy market for Major League Baseball. The Marlins regularly rank near the bottom in home attendance despite two World Series championships during the past nine seasons. Last season?s attendance of just over 1.8 million fans was substantially below the MLB average of nearly 2.5 million. But attendance is simply a counting stat, and we can analyze the data to explore a little deeper before writing off South Florida as a hopeless baseball backwater.

 

Fan support is just one variable in the attendance demand function. Teams operate in disparate market environments and with unique bundles of quality-price attributes. For simplicity, suppose teams A and B are identical in every respect including incidence and intensity rates for local baseball fans, except for a population of 4 million in market A and 2 million in market B. It?s reasonable to expect that team A will generate greater attendance, all other variables being equal.

 

Sports economists build regression models to analyze the effects of these variables on the demand to attend sports events. The models typically explain around 60% of the variance in attendance among teams. Because a model can incorporate only observable inputs such as ticket and concession prices, market income and population, stadium age, and team winning percentage, the unexplained 40% includes intangibles like fan loyalty and marketing effects (plus random error). If we fit a model that does a good job of predicting an average team?s attendance and then compare predicted vs. actual attendance, we could interpret the difference as a measure of a fan loyalty and support for a team.

 

Several studies have confirmed the link between winning and attendance in baseball. A particular team?s sensitivity to this effect can vary greatly, though. When an MLB club performs efficiently at the gate, predicted season-long average attendance will be close to the actual attendance number. A team that enjoys intense fan support?think of markets like Boston and St. Louis ?is super-efficient at converting its price-quality-market attributes into paying customers. Fans remain loyal and keep paying to watch baseball games regardless of the team?s performance. At the opposite end of the spectrum, Tampa Bay?s inefficiency means that winning 21% more games in 2005 to reach the .500 mark would have increased attendance only by about 8%.

 

To quantify this notion of attendance efficiency, I use a conversion ratio scale where 1.0 suggests neutral fan support (attribute inputs = attendance output). Most MLB teams produce conversion ratios between 0.8 and 1.2, and these values tend to stay consistent over the 2000-2005 seasons included in this analysis.

 

The following table compares per game attendance predicted by the demand model versus actual attendance for Florida?s past six seasons:

 

 

Predicted Avg Observed Avg Conversion

Season Attendance Attendance Difference Ratio

2000 22,903 15,229 -7674 0.66

2001 25,282 15,765 -9517 0.62

2002 23,236 10,038 -13198 0.43

2003 24,921 16,290 -8631 0.65

2004 28,025 22,091 -5944 0.79

2005 28,065 22,792 -5273 0.81

The Loria regime took control of the Marlins in 2002, when discouraged fans purchased fewer than 2,000 season tickets. Over the next three seasons fans gradually returned to Pro Player/Dolphins Stadium, and by 2005 actual attendance was within around 5,000 fans of the number modeled from the team?s price-quality-market attributes. Conversion ratio, an approximation of intangible fan loyalty, has consistently trended upward to a nearly respectable 0.81. Given the team?s combination of performance, market, and stadium inputs?many of which are beyond management?s control?the Marlins? plan to rebuild and reenergize South Florida baseball fans appears to be working. Not by quantum leaps, as the team might wish, but by perhaps more realistic incremental progress.

 

So exactly how bad a market for big league baseball is Miami? Using the 2005 conversion ratio and predicted-observed difference statistics as proxies for fan loyalty, South Florida fans may not be as blas? as hypothesized. The Marlins? attendance efficiency was similar to that of the 2005 World Series winner and the host market for the 2005 All Star Game, and considerably better than that of the cross-state AL franchise:

 

Pred.-Obs

Attendance Conversion

Team Difference Ratio

FLA -5,273 0.81

CHA -6,414 0.82

DET -5,656 0.82

MIN -4,813 0.84

OAK -5,307 0.83

TB -8,437 0.62

The ?significant market correction? being made by the Marlins to bring payroll in line with revenue makes business sense. The degree of fan support for Oakland seems similar to that for Florida, forcing general manager Admin Beinfest to play his own version of Moneyball. That?s not necessarily a bad thing. And don?t be surprised if the effects on future attendance from the great ?fire sale? of 2005 are nothing like those after 1997.

Any article such as this that does not include among its variables the effect of weather on attendance is by definition flawed.

 

I believe, and will always believe, having seen it so many times with my own eyes and heard it scores of times, that fans didn't give up on the Marlins (hence the very strong tv numbers), they gave up on the venue.

 

PPS, in the broiling south florida broiling sun is literally hell on earth.

 

And when it's raining it's is no place to bring a family either. There's no getting around it.

 

I don't want to hear about "real fans" don't let these things bother them, the reason that attendance is what it is, is because the casual fan, just finds PPS so uninviting for themselves and their families, that frankly, I'm amazed attendance isn't lower.

Any article such as this that does not include among its variables the effect of weather on attendance is by definition flawed.

 

I believe, and will always believe, having seen it so many times with my own eyes and heard it scores of times, that fans didn't give up on the Marlins (hence the very strong tv numbers), they gave up on the venue.

 

PPS, in the broiling south florida broiling sun is literally hell on earth.

 

And when it's raining it's is no place to bring a family either. There's no getting around it.

 

I don't want to hear about "real fans" don't let these things bother them, the reason that attendance is what it is, is because the casual fan, just finds PPS so uninviting for themselves and their families, that frankly, I'm amazed attendance isn't lower.

 

 

He's not really putting the fans down. At least that's not my impression. He's saying the market is there for the taking - but other factors are to blame for low attendance. He doesn't mention any of the factors directly - he indirectly mentions the firesale after 1997. You've got other variables that are statistically very difficult to take into account - and the effects of weather is probably one of them. Obviously, what the Marlins need is to get a stadium with a retractable roof.

The article doesn't suggest that the fans gave up on them at all, if that's what you're getting at '03.

 

And while I agree that weather plays a large factor, I haven't seen studies that have attempted to quantify weather into attendance figures. If you're aware of any I'd be interested in seeing them.

I guess I could have chosen my words more carefully.

 

To both Prin and Hot, that was not my observation, nor the message I was trying to articulate. Simply it was, that there are lots of reasons why things are the way they are and not acknowledging the ones I mentioned, even in passing, makes an otherwise excellent piece imperfect and incomplete.

I guess I could have chosen my words more carefully.

 

To both Prin and Hot, that was not my observation, nor the message I was trying to articulate. Simply it was, that there are lots of reasons why things are the way they are and not acknowledging the ones I mentioned, even in passing, makes an otherwise excellent piece imperfect and incomplete.

 

 

I agree. He should have said, some of the variables that affect attendance but that we can't measure are weather, blah blah blah.

I guess I could have chosen my words more carefully.

 

To both Prin and Hot, that was not my observation, nor the message I was trying to articulate. Simply it was, that there are lots of reasons why things are the way they are and not acknowledging the ones I mentioned, even in passing, makes an otherwise excellent piece imperfect and incomplete.

 

 

I think the weather would have diluted the message somewhat. Since weather facts are seen as excusses for the most part.

 

I like the numerical/statistical approach of this article.

There will never be a "perfect" formula for something like this, but I agree that omitting weather from the equation leaves a big unknown variable... especially since it's a bigger factor for the Marlins than for any other team. I just don't think they felt comfortable attaching a number to it. Someone somewhere has to have looked at it closer....

It's a fine article.

 

Still, I hold on fiercely to the belief that the effect total attendance has in a team's business success is greatly overrated, and blaming the Marlins' woes on its fans is nothing more than uneducated scapegoating.

 

A well-run modern franchise generates almost all of its revenue from other sources (some of which the Marlins are unable to tap into thanks to Huizenga) -- corporate partnerships, media contracts, advertising sales, luxury box rent, season tickets, etc.

 

In the grand scheme, good walk-up ticket sales and bragging rights are collateral -- and something savvy and dedicated marketing/PR (something the Marlins are notoriously lacking) can easily improve if neccessary.

 

 

Any article such as this that does not include among its variables the effect of weather on attendance is by definition flawed.

 

I believe, and will always believe, having seen it so many times with my own eyes and heard it scores of times, that fans didn't give up on the Marlins (hence the very strong tv numbers), they gave up on the venue.

 

PPS, in the broiling south florida broiling sun is literally hell on earth.

 

And when it's raining it's is no place to bring a family either. There's no getting around it.

 

I don't want to hear about "real fans" don't let these things bother them, the reason that attendance is what it is, is because the casual fan, just finds PPS so uninviting for themselves and their families, that frankly, I'm amazed attendance isn't lower.

 

I agree with your points. A roof would certainly help. So would making more Fish Tank-priced tickets available -- especially on weekdays when the upper decks are closed, and working-class families are forced to turn away at the box office because the Outfield is sold-out and they can't afford to sit in the remaining sections.

 

Some have argued that Marlins tickets are reasonably priced compared to other markets. This is true to a point. What happens is there are not enough reasonably priced tickets for the average So.Fla. fan to attend a weekday game that sells, like a Mets series. This displacing of "on-a-budget" fans significantly affects attendance as well.

South Florida Restaurant Closes: Blames Non-Patrons for not liking bad food

South Florida Restaurant Closes: Blames Non-Patrons for not liking bad food

 

MLB isn't like every other business. I know you know that. Just some MLB critics don't care to acknowledge that.

They are partially at fault.

I vote that the reason there aren't more fans is the venue.

 

I surely don't enjoy ROASTING at games...nor Getting Peed on by the Gods

i know JR/PPS/DS is uncomfortable as hell for a guy like me (6'1" 250) seats too small... very little room between rows... but yet ill endure it anytime i go to a game..

I vote that the reason there aren't more fans is the venue.

 

I surely don't enjoy ROASTING at games...nor Getting Peed on by the Gods

 

At night it's pretty pleasant there. Day games suck wherever you go though.

I remember one night game I went to last year I left early because the humidity was so damn awful it became hard to breath. During the summer, certain times of the time can get unbearable humidity. I don't know where you get this pretty pleasant notion from.

 

In Power Alley, you don't really have that problem though. And if you rains, you can go inside.

Miami is just not a very good sports town. The Dolphins only draw when they're winning, the Marlins only draw when they're giving something cool away.

 

What could possibly be a valid excuse for teams like the Royals and Pirates out-drawing the Marlins? Let me help you out.........the fans are pathetic. It rains in KC and Pitt too, and it's hot there in the summer too.

Miami is just not a very good sports town. The Dolphins only draw when they're winning, the Marlins only draw when they're giving something cool away.

 

What could possibly be a valid excuse for teams like the Royals and Pirates out-drawing the Marlins? Let me help you out.........the fans are pathetic. It rains in KC and Pitt too, and it's hot there in the summer too.

 

 

I'm not going to defend Miami fans, but what kind of comparison is that? KC & Pitt don't outdraw the Marlins. They have virtually the same attendance as Florida does. And KC & Pitt don't have the same threat of rain as Miami.

Miami is just not a very good sports town. The Dolphins only draw when they're winning, the Marlins only draw when they're giving something cool away.

 

What could possibly be a valid excuse for teams like the Royals and Pirates out-drawing the Marlins? Let me help you out.........the fans are pathetic. It rains in KC and Pitt too, and it's hot there in the summer too.

 

 

I'm not going to defend Miami fans, but what kind of comparison is that? KC & Pitt don't outdraw the Marlins. They have virtually the same attendance as Florida does. And KC & Pitt don't have the same threat of rain as Miami.

They have horrible teams is my point. The Marlins put a team on the field that should have drawn fans.....admit it.....you don't have a leg to stand on.

 

I was wrong about the attendance......the Marlins out-drew the Royals, Devil Rays and Pirates.....but not the Rockies, Reds, Rangers, Tigers, or anyone else.

 

They will finish LAST in attendance this year and wins in the major-leagues.

This should make Swifty happy.

 

At moments like this the thing that comes to mind is one of my favorite cliches - ignorance is bliss.

Miami is just not a very good sports town. The Dolphins only draw when they're winning, the Marlins only draw when they're giving something cool away.

 

What could possibly be a valid excuse for teams like the Royals and Pirates out-drawing the Marlins? Let me help you out.........the fans are pathetic. It rains in KC and Pitt too, and it's hot there in the summer too.

 

 

I'm not going to defend Miami fans, but what kind of comparison is that? KC & Pitt don't outdraw the Marlins. They have virtually the same attendance as Florida does. And KC & Pitt don't have the same threat of rain as Miami.

They have horrible teams is my point. The Marlins put a team on the field that should have drawn fans.....admit it.....you don't have a leg to stand on.Admit what? Since I wasn't arguing that south florida has good fans, I admit nothing. The attendance has improved at least slightly each season lately. I'll take small increases over a decrease. And when you're talking about a fanbase as poor as south florida is, a gradual increase may be the most they can hope for.

I was wrong about the attendance......the Marlins out-drew the Royals, Devil Rays and Pirates.....but not the Rockies, Reds, Rangers, Tigers, or anyone else.

No problem, we all make mistakes.

They will finish LAST in attendance this year and wins in the major-leagues.

 

Really going out on a limb there!

 

I'm sensing a trend here. You seem awfully intent on proving something to Marlins fans. What is it you think we're not already aware of, that the Marlins have poor attendance? That the team will struggle this season?

 

"Damn you Marlins fans for being optimistic! Wallow in the misery of baseball hell! Waste away in the limbo of payroll flexibility! AAAAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!"

 

Move along.

Just expressing my dis-pleasure with the Marlins, and their ownership which is starting to treat their small fan base like dogs.....that's all. I'm confident that they don't care about anything but their bottom line, which is fine because they shouldn't be asked to lose money every year.........but David Samson is a complete idiot for attacking the fans!

 

I have a feeling they watched the movie "Major League" recently and are really wanting to move the team....and that makes it very hard to support them.